SynthMakernix ·
I was just wondering if Outsim plans to make SM 64 bit compatible? I understand there are significant advantages to 64bit OS? Wishing contents
64 bit in the works?
From the original SynthMaker forum (2004–2014), with its members’ names and dates.
infuzion ·
64 bit audio or 64 bit Windows XP/Vista/7?
nix ·
Operating system. Orion 64 bit is available now- linky> http://www.synapse-audio.com/index.php . I was wondering if folk think we will all go to 64bit OS? Cheers Also can 32 bit plugs run on a 64 bit OS?
infuzion ·
Seems that 64bit hosts are going to be the wave of the future, near future actually.
MichaelBenjamin ·
i run sm on win7 64 bit and i dont care if it gets ported to native 64. 64 bit audio on the other side would be similar to the 4xdouble float format, which is useful for filters, long iterative sequences and the waveplayer, where the precision is needed, so why not.
attic ·
Synthedit now has a 64bit version
infuzion ·
MichaelBenjamin wrote: i run sm on win7 64 bit and i dont care if it gets ported to native 64.
I think 80% of the SM users don't care for now, but I know a SM developer who lost a big contract because of the lack of 64bit port.
MichaelBenjamin ·
whats the use besides ram usage for 64 bit? sm could first use all 32 bit ram. if some contract is lost because of no 64 bit port for no apparent reason maybe it contained nonsense terms right from the beginning.
McBarGig ·
The terms of that agreement were simple, 32 and 64 bit support for VST plug. The deal was done, and 64 bit could not be accommodated, so the deal was lost. I know that guy, and it was an absolutely HUGE deal lost...I'd mention more of what it was about, but I'm under NDA so I can't, but lets just say, 64 Bit is an absolute must, no question about it. Without it, there is almost zero future for sm developed plugs past another year and a half, after that forget it.
People can argue and say why 64 bit is not important, but it is, and it is coming fast. It will be lack of 64 bit support that kills SM. If no one wants to run a 32 bit vst, then no one will want to develop them. Very simple...
It does not matter whether we can see usage for it, its whether the user sees usage for it. If the user sees they have to run bit bridge, or j-bridge, then they'll find options where they don't have to run that, those options will come in the form of other VST plugs that run native 64 bit and our plugs will simply not be used.
Some here awhile ago theorized that SM was a dieing product that Outsim had lost interest in it, well if they don't implement 64bit then that will tell you straight away that the product is on the way out. 64Bit should be at the very top of the list for things that SM needs to survive.
Just my 2 cents..
bootsy ·
Agreed, 64bit should be definately addressed 😈 this year bei Outsim.
nix ·
I thought I'd bump this one. I plan to go to 64 bit. If my plugs need to be bridged I probably won't. Any thoughts Admin?
infuzion ·
nix wrote: I thought I'd bump this one. I plan to go to 64 bit. If my plugs need to be bridged I probably won't. Any thoughts Admin?
Are there really enough 64bit plugs for you to do that?
nix ·
I only need SM ones really 🙂 Sorry for not belling you for a while man, just straighten a lot of things out and send you updated .osms. Much regard edit-oh and I can run 32 bit Orion with plugs on 64, but I am looking to access more RAM, as Entrancer's wavetables are so RAM heavy
attic ·
Hi nix
If my plugs need to be bridged I probably won't
You should do it. I went to win7 64 mid last year and truth be told it wasn't the huge pain that I had expected. I use Reaper and performance even if its bridged is great. It opens up extra resources and I also recommend getting an SSD as they are now cheaper very solid and speed your system along nicely. I haven't ran into very many programs that don't run well and if you do compatibility modes usually works to fix it. You will have to get used to the two programs folders x86 and 64 but that isn't anything to worry about as win 7 just uses separate folders for 64 and x86 programs. Do check for drivers before making the move but most mfg's have released stable drivers by now.
I do believe it is time for 64 bit but I hope that outsim works on real voice management first.
attic ·
Are there really enough 64bit plugs for you to do that?
Depends on what your needs are, but I run certain setups that are all 64 bit. Usually I do my mastering in Reaper 64 with all 64 bit plugs. ( izotope, Fabfilter, Voxengo, Psp )
infuzion ·
attic wrote: Are there really enough 64bit plugs for you to do that?
Depends on what your needs are, but I run certain setups that are all 64 bit. Usually I do my mastering in Reaper 64 with all 64 bit plugs. ( izotope, Fabfilter, Voxengo, Psp )
Indeed, that is all you need!
Hmmm, I think I'm going to write Malc an email encouraging another SM re-write, since we need Mac + 64bit audio also.
attic ·
Indeed, that is all you need!
I sense sarcasm. 😈
Well no, I use a lot more than that in the creation of the tracks, but for mastering when I'm a hundred or more tracks deep that would be typical for my final master out. I do tend to keep it 64 bit at that point.
Bootsy has some great stuff for a mastering chain so its not always 64 bit. Thanks bootsy.
To be honest I'm just happy to see SM 2 and would shit bricks if real voice management ever happened.
nix ·
Hey thanks Attic, I'll deal with 2 sets of programs and upgrade my RAM. I have my copy of 7 ready to go 🙂 Cheers for the heads up What is the major issue with voice management? I have unison working with little modding, but wish I could send all notes off via MIDI. Something is wrong with the status # I think
nix ·
infuzion wrote: Hmmm, I think I'm going to write Malc an email encouraging another SM re-write, since we need Mac + 64bit audio also.
Do you think VST3 would be desirable too? I'm not exactly sure what it entails
Tzarls ·
AFAIK, Steinberg is trying hard to sell the vst3 idea, but most developers are still attached to the 2.4 spec. That could be to the fact that only Steinberg´s DAWs support vst3, so porting for only 1 host isn´t worth the effort.
Andrew J ·
Tzarls wrote: AFAIK, Steinberg is trying hard to sell the vst3 idea, but most developers are still attached to the 2.4 spec. That could be to the fact that only Steinberg´s DAWs support vst3, so porting for only 1 host isn´t worth the effort.
I believe Presonus Studio One supports VST3 also...
Tzarls ·
Yes, that´s right.
McBarGig ·
No VST3 is not important to me, 64 bit is right at the top of my list for most wanted/needed things..
nix ·
Up! We SM devs need this, very much. Soon everyone will be on 64bit OS. Could we hear whether it is planned? Thanks 🙂
infuzion ·
nix wrote: Up! We SM devs need this, very much. Soon everyone will be on 64bit OS. Could we hear whether it is planned? Thanks 🙂
You'll have to bug Malc via email directly I'm sure.
Nu Audio Science ·
We really do need 64bit badly at this point for the reasons infuzion stated back at the start of the thread.
mano11 ·
I too run on 64 bit Win 7, and i must admit i prefer 64 bit versions of my vst plugins. I agree. This is a must for SM. If its going to survive in the near future.
Nu Audio Science ·
Englebert BUMP a dink
Nu Audio Science ·
Latest news Sibelius 7 released only big feature X64 Podium 3 released only feature X64
NAS
ryskdsp ·
The thing with native x64 O/S compatibility is NOT that audio will sound any smoother or better and all that nonsense.
The thing is that x64 hosts can adress much more RAM than x86 hosts, so people working with massive sample libraries that pre-load their samples into RAM (like myself) prefer accessing more than 3GB of RAM for increased responsiveness and performance regarding their sample playback.
If they, like myself, use a native x64 host software for doing that, then the plugins they use have to be x64 compatible. If they're not compatible, they won't work, can't be loaded, can't be used.
There ARE so called bit-bridges like jBridge etc. which act as "translators" to make x86 plugins available and work inside x64 host applications -and the other way round- but these bridges are pretty buggy, because they're not tailored to fit specific plugins but to stay pretty general and fit "most" plugins. Also, these bit-bridges are containers, "plugins that load plugins", so when you open the GUI in your host to modify some plugin parameters, host-related commands like spacebar for play/stop etc. won't "go through" to the host. Completely cripples workflow for let's say mastering purposes and ruins the hectic play/pause rapid fire during mixing. Doesn't sound like a drastic drawback, but if you're doing serious work on your DAW - it is.
Yes, "they work". But just because they work doesn't mean it's good that way.
Now the critical point is - user XYZ, who is a bedroom producer and uses maybe a drum sampler and some Kontakt strings, probably won't ever use 3GB of RAM in one of his projects and therefore doesn't need or depend on x64 compatible stuff; he can just stay with his x86 host in maybe his x64 O/S and happily continue to use x86 plugins.
But user ABC, who is a promising and known producer of (sampled) orchestral scores, will need and use all the RAM he can get his sweaty little hands on, so to him native x64 compatibility for the host and his plugins is essential. Think he might want to spend his time re-starting his host a thousand times per day because the unreliable x86/x64 bit-bridge crashed it again, runining another 15 precious minutes of his work time, just because he has to put up with the sad fact that his essential everyday-use plugins are being held back from evolution and not ported into a current format?
I myself have switched to using x64 host and plugins only, because it meant an improvement to my DAW's overall performance and responsiveness when working with large sample libraries. Which, of course, means I had to drop Waves and some other nice plugin gems that aren't x64 compatible, but there are enough alternatives from other developers to completely make up for this loss.
I can't be bothered with deliberately provoking host crashes or ruining my workflow, just to help developers avoid progress. For me, if a plugin is not x64 compatible it means it will empair me, so it's plain uninteresting = dead.
x64 architecture has been around for 8 years now in the Windows world, since XP x64 came out in 2003. More than enough time to adapt. If you (as a developer in general, not focused on outsim) haven't yet, or aren't at least still working on porting x86 stuff to x64, then I assume you don't wish to support my needs - so I won't support yours, meaning: one less sale.
I know I'm not the only one thinking like this.
EDIT to explain what this means:
Developers without native x64 versions of their plugins will slowly but surely be left behind, and their produrcts will remain to be used only in outdated setups. To any commercial developer, this would mean certain death, as competition by x64 developers will become too strong - if it isn't already.
So if SynthMaker stays x86 only and won't support exporting native x64 plugins, either VST or VSTi, a lot of small commercial developers will probably give up struggling with a working environment that only enables them to create outdated formats, and turn to an environment that will make their plugins up-to-date again.
I'm pretty sure a lot of potential future SM customers will be scared off by the fact that their possible future products might only be interesting for a tiny percentage of "old dogs" who don't support the x64 movement because they don't understand it or have no need for it.
Let alone the bad reputation SM plugins have with plugin devotees already. Long loading times, high CPU munch, and now it turns out they're also incompatible to 8 year old technology... Time to do something, I'd say.
$0.02
trogluddite ·
Very well said!
Even though I am just a 'bedroom tinkerer', this issue matters to me for precisely the reasons you outline at the end. I have no personal need for 64bit, VST3.x, Mac OS etc.; but I DO want to continue to use my favourite DSP mangling software in the future You also mention the reputation for high CPU - which is also related to being 'behind the times' - i.e. even in assembly, we still only have access to a handful of the SSE2 op-codes, let alone later, more efficient extensions to the SIMD instruction set - presumably all of SM's built in primitives are also programmed using 'legacy' CPU instructions.
Unless they start to bring these factors up to date, lack of sales will eventually force them to stop selling, updating and supporting SM - in the worst case, leading to OutSim going out of business altogether. For the many 'amateurs' here, our livelihood and professional status may not be damaged by this, as it would be for a 'pro' - but if we want to continue to use this software, we are still affected.
tor ·
I sent a mail to Malc about some crash error stuff. In the same mail I asked about 64 bit DSP.
I got an answer from Malc today and this is what he said about the 64 bit question:
We have a few double precision components which you probably already know about. We're not currently working on expanding on these but we wouldn't rule out doing so in the future.
Not around the corner i guess. But not ruled out at least.
I answerd him and encouraged him to get help from the most dedicated people with programming skills here on the forum.
Happy Smaking Tor
rl ·
yes,but... as ryskdsp perfectly pointed out - 64 bit is about the memory model not double precision maths (which in its own right needs to be better supported too).
aliasant ·
rl wrote: yes,but... as ryskdsp perfectly pointed out - 64 bit is about the memory model not double precision maths (which in its own right needs to be better supported too).
And to be able to export as a 64bit plug so that all those that are using 64bit Hosts can use them without any nasty conversions. Everyone will soon use a 64bit host so the clock is ticking. Sounds to me like maybe Malc misunderstood the question?
infuzion ·
There are 2 "64 bit" issues: 1) 64bit OS-compatible VST & Exe Exporting. I assume that is what the OT was. 2) 64bit audio stream. Has a separate thread with a plan.
McBarGig ·
I asked Malc whether there was a plan in place for 64 bit, he just said its on the Radar..
nix ·
Yep, the original topic was VST for 64 -bit OS
Nu Audio Science ·
Are we there yet ?
infuzion ·
See anything new here yet? viewforum.php?f=23
Wrote something here? To have a post removed or your name hidden, write to [email protected].